Collision with terrain

The pilot taxied out for take-off on strip 36. Run up and pre-take-off checks were normal. Full power was applied for take-off and the aircraft accelerated. However, by two thirds to three quarters of the 1000 metre length the aircraft was not airborne. The pilot applied back pressure on the control column and lifted off. The airspeed then decreased so the pilot lowered the nose. The left wing dropped, and the aircraft descended, striking the ground nose down and overturning.

The pilot had inadvertently taken off in strong gusty downwind conditions.

Significant Factors

The following factors were considered relevant to the development of the accident:

1. The pilot did not pay adequate attention to ascertaining the direction of the wind.

2. The pilot attempted a take-off in strong downwind conditions.

The aircraft was engaged in a powerline inspection. The crew had identified a downed powerline. During an approach to land, to carry out a closer inspection, the helicopter collided with a second powerline that was still in place. It crashed in a near vertical attitude.

Wreckage inspection indicated that one main rotor blade had made solid contact with the powerline.

The pilot indicated, before his injuries took full affect, that he had forgotten about the second line. He has been unable to provide any further information.

The pilot was conducting a local flight in weather conditions which were fine, but with a gusty 20-25 kts south-easterly wind blowing.

On return a normal approach for landing was made at 85 kts, with the touchdown at 80 kts. About 250 metres into the landing roll a wind gust, combined with the aircraft canard design and undulation in the airstrip surface, caused the aircraft nose to pitch up through 45 degrees, and become airborne again.

Before the pilot could take recovery action the aircraft stalled and impacted the airstrip in a steep nose down attitude. It then bounced and skipped across the ground on its nose for about 28 metres before tipping over onto its back.

The pilot was engaged in circuit training at the time of the accident. He reported that, during the circuit conducted prior to the accident, the controls felt stiff although they appeared to be working correctly.

Following touchdown, with the tail down and the pilot holding the stick back, the left wing started to dip. The pilot initiated a go-round and applied full power. The aircraft began to veer to the left and the pilot was unable to correct the turn with either rudder or ailerons. The aircraft crashed inverted, 60 metres to the left of the centre line, still with full power applied.

The crosswind at the time of the accident was approximately 8 knots from the left. The reason for the reported stiffness in the controls was not determined.

Pilot reported that the aircraft encountered sink soon after take-off. The main wheels contacted the crop (tea) and the aircraft nosed over. The pilot indicated that there were no mechanical problems with the aircraft of which he was aware. The aircraft had been operating with similar loads throughout the day. The wind was gusting at the time of the accident, and there was a possibility of windshear being present. In addition, the pilot had conducted more than 80 flights on the day of the accident, for about 6 hours flying time. It is possible, therefore, that he was suffering some fatigue at the time of the accident.

The pilot reported that when he returned to the airfield after a short local flight, the windsock was indicating a strong southerly wind. He therefore elected to land on the 180 degree strip. The approach and flare were normal except for some turbulence. However, during the hold off the aircraft encountered a particularly strong gust. This resulted in the aircraft ballooning with the right wing low and substantial right drift.

The pilot said he immediately applied power to go around but was unable to stop the drift. As the aircraft was now tracking towards a nearby hangar, he turned further right to avoid it but was then confronted with trees and houses beyond. As he believed he would not clear the trees he closed the throttle and attempted to land in a clear area. The aircraft hit the ground heavily on the right wingtip and then cartwheeled, coming to rest after about 50 metres.

The pilot said that after he got out of the aircraft, he assessed the wind strength was 20 knots with gusts to 35 knots.

The pilot reported that he was spraying a potato crop and had 150 litres of chemical on board. Weather conditions were fine with a south easterly wind of three to five knots. He commenced his first run which was in a westerly direction and uphill.

At the end of the run, he switched off the spray and commenced a left climbing turn to avoid a nine metre high hedge with a house behind. The aircraft did not respond to control inputs and started to head for the hedge. The pilot managed to avoid the hedge but said the aircraft felt "mushy" and started to go down. The aircraft hit the ground and rolled over.

The pilot did not claim there was any fault with the engine. He had been flying a more powerful turbine powered helicopter until recently when he was endorsed on the Hughes 300. He had limited experience on the aircraft type at the time of the accident.

During an aero-tow take-off in gusting wind conditions, the pilot lost control of the aircraft after the right wing dropped and dragged on the ground. The glider pilot released the tow rope and attempted to regain directional control to avoid a collision with the boundary fence. He applied full flap and ground looped the glider. However, as the aircraft swung, the tail and the trailing edge of the left wing struck the fence.

During a solo training circuit, the pilot was subjected to some minor distractions involving other aircraft. The resulting circuit was cramped and the aircraft rolled out high on final approach. The pilot selected the dive brakes and then did not recognise the resulting undershoot until late on final approach. He then dived the aircraft to maintain speed, forgetting to retract the dive brakes. The left wing struck a tree, and the aircraft came to rest inverted. The pilot, who was inexperienced on type, possibly had a temporary lapse of concentration when the approach became dangerously low and forgot to retract the speed brakes.

The pilot had planned to ferry the aircraft to Rockhampton in accordance with the Visual Flight Rules. He had also arranged to return to Sydney the same day by airline, so as to be able to spend Christmas at home. In order to connect with the return flight, the ferry flight needed to depart before dawn. A weather forecast obtained by the pilot the night before the flight indicated conditions would be unsuitable for visual flight to Coffs Harbour.

The pilot said that when he arrived at Bankstown Airport early the next morning, he assessed the weather as being slightly better than forecast. Consequently, he departed at about 0350, without lodging flight details, and proceeded to fly north up the lane of entry. Passing Patonga the weather started to deteriorate. Light drizzle associated with a decreasing cloud base caused him to consider whether to continue or return. He then noticed that the directional gyro began to malfunction and would not stay aligned with the magnetic compass. Whilst trying to rectify that problem he also noticed that the ADF indications appeared to be unreliable. With his attention diverted by the instrument problems, the pilot lost visual contact with the coastline and decided to return to Bankstown using the magnetic compass as a heading reference. Whilst in a timed turn to the left the aircraft collided with trees and was destroyed.

After regaining consciousness, the pilot managed to extricate himself from the wreckage and walk three kilometres to a farmhouse, over hilly, heavily timbered terrain.